Walter Russell Meade has postulated an interesting set of definitions for the American political landscape, at least as far as the foreign policy arena goes. Rather than using the traditional left/right, Democratic/Republican models, he’s worked out four schools of “American” foreign policy thought, named after influential American statesmen who epitomize the principles of those schools. In brief, they are:
- Jacksonian
- Hamiltonian
- Jeffersonian
- Wilsonian
All four of these schools of thought have had significant impacts in the larger world. Major international organizations derive from these fundamentally American ideals.
So, what are these schools, and what do they represent?
The
Jacksonian tradition is perhaps the least well-known, and certainly the least
understood of the four schools of thought that Meade defines. Jacksonians tend
to be looked down upon – despite the fact that by the numbers, they appear to
be the largest of the four schools. The driving belief of the Jacksonian school
of thought is that the first priority of the U.S. Government in both foreign
and domestic policy is the physical security and economic well-being of the
American populace. Jacksonians believe that the US shouldn't seek out foreign
quarrels, but if a war starts, the basic belief is "there's no substitute
for victory" – and Jacksonians will do pretty much whatever is required to
make that victory happen. If you wanted a Jacksonian slogan, it's "Don't
Tread On Me!" Jacksonians are generally viewed by the rest of the world as
having a simplistic, uncomplicated view of the world, despite quite a bit of
evidence to the contrary.
Hamiltonian
doctrine is really the doctrine that pushes the economic primacy of the United
States. Hamiltonians believe that a fundamental link between the government and
big business is key to the survival and success of the country. They are,
however, realists who believe that the US is at best primus inter pares among
other nations. As a result, they believe that the US is best served by
international organizations that protect fundamentally American interests. If
you're looking for Hamiltonian legacies, look at things like the IMF, World
Bank, NAFTA, and the WTO. Hamiltonians
believe that the US should be integrated into the global economy on the most
favorable terms possible, and that this above all else drives the success of
the American system. Well known Hamiltonians include George H. W. Bush, Henry
Cabot Lodge, and Bill Clinton.
Jeffersonians
are most interested in protection of American democracy on the home front, and
almost as misunderstood as Jacksonians. They believe that foreign entanglements
are a sure method of damaging American democractic systems, and are highly
skeptical of Hamiltonian/Wilsonian projects to involve the US abroad.
Hamiltonians and Wilsonians have a realistic streak, that the United States is
fundamentally a state among states, if better managed. Jeffersonians, in
contrast, believe that the United States is something better and different. You
often find Jeffersonians protesting against international agreements,
rather than for them.
Wilsonians
believe that both the moral and national interests of the United States are
best served by spreading American democratic and social values throughout the
world. They want to see the U.S. involved on a worldwide basis with a peaceful
international community based on the rule of law. Want a Wilsonian
organization? Look no further than the United
Nations, perhaps the quintessentially Wilsonian creation.
|
Walter Russell Meade, and a number of other individuals,
have written quite a bit on these concepts. The original introduction of
these schools of thought was in Meade’s "Special Providence",
published in early 2002. An interesting point to note is that Meade finished
writing the book in July, 2001, but he makes some very prescient comments
about subsequent events, including the reaction to the events of Sept. 11,
2001. |
|
In addition, Mr. Meade wrote a very illuminating article on his four schools of thought for the National Interest. The National Interest has subsequently pulled the article from their publicly-available website. However, a copy of the article is available here.
In addition, there has been a great deal of subsequent discussion on the topic. A web search such as this produces a great deal of potentially interesting information..
Copyright Charles Prael, 2003-2005. All Rights Reserved.